Add products to a manual Shopify collection and receive the updated collection state, enabling multi-store admin management with per-store authorization.
Add products to a manual collection and return its current state.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| store | Yes | ||
| confirm | Yes | True only after authorization for this store and exact change. | |
| productIds | Yes | ||
| collectionId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare the tool to be destructive and non-idempotent, so the description only needs to add contextual behavior. It adds that the operation is on a manual collection and returns the current state, but does not disclose authorization requirements or side effects beyond that.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning: the action, the resource type, the target, and the return value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description is acceptable for a simple mutation tool given the annotations and schema, but it does not describe the return state format, the store parameter, or the confirm gating behavior. The schema partially compensates, but gaps remain.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is only 25%, and the description does not explain parameters. It loosely maps 'products' to productIds and 'collection' to collectionId, but leaves store and confirm without semantic guidance. The description should compensate for the low schema coverage and does not.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a concrete verb ('Add'), a specific resource ('products to a manual collection'), and an outcome ('return its current state'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from collection creation/update siblings.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'manual collection' provides clear context and implicitly excludes smart/automatic collections. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, so it stops short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.